turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Mexican-American War
Edit Request 4/24/2015 The war table needs to be updated and the article does not need to be protected anymore. I would've done my request myself, but like I said, the page is protected (probably from the vandalism the the article received back in 2008). For what I want done include adding a few more leaders to the war table and redirect general Winfield Scott's name to his article. -- 11:08, April 24, 2015 (UTC)Jacob Chesley the Alternate Historian The Two Georges How about the title "Nuevespañolan War," with redirect, for the T2G section? It's an obvious but not too speculative name like Second Great War or French and Spanish War for something that's never formally named in the book.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 03:04, April 17, 2016 (UTC) :Its not that obvious a name for that war in universe. I don't see such a very British society calling a war with such a foreign name as "Nuevespañolan". It might be called the "War of 1848" the way the "War of 1812" was in OTL although, I admit, that had a more limited effect in OTL. I think TR's proposal is more reasonable. It really doesn't fit here despite some similarities to OTL. ML4E (talk) 18:05, April 17, 2016 (UTC) The War Between the Provinces I'm surprised there wasn't a MW analog referenced in a Detinan context, since the analogs of several main characters fought in MW. The Detinans could reminisce about fighting on the same side against the Empire of Ocemix during the reign of King James the Poker. :There are indications that prewar history doesn't march as closely with US history as the wartime history does, at least for things that aren't directly related to the Antebellum (like the compromises that Webster, Clay and Calhoun worked out). There's reference to the fact that the ethnic Detinans are descended from settlers from a "mother kingdom" across the sea, but not a word about the circumstances of their achieving independence. I got the impression that the kingdom was much older than the United States. Part of that is because, when Bart is promoted to Marshal, it's mentioned that he was the first Detinan general to make Marshal in "a long lifetime," but no mention of it going back to a Founding Father :(Historical context: In 1865, Grant became "General of the Army United States," the first title of such supremacy since Congress created the title "General of the Armies" as an honorific for the dying Washington in 1799. When Washington was in active service his title was "General and Commander-in-Chief," but following the ratification of the Constitution the POTUS became Commander-in-Chief so that wouldn't do anymore. Washington wore three stars, and the Congressional resolution in '99 ordered that three-star rank be retired thereafter. Grant got his third star in early 1864, and his fourth after the war ended in 1865, and the latter date coincides with his promotion to General of the Army, which was the first title with supremacy built in in 66 years--not exactly a long lifetime, but long enough to claim all the perks of senior citizenship. The title of Marshal would align with Grant's post-war promotion, but the event it aligns with in the book is his early 1864 promotion to three-star. Three-star generals were rare between 1799 and 1864, but not unheard of; Winfield Scott certainly comes right to mind. Three-star rank became common after the creation of four-star rank for Grant. Along with Grant's third star came reassignment to the position of Commanding General, a position held by Scott as both a two- and three-star general and by a pair of two-star generals between Scott's forced retirement and Grant's ascension. That position was more of a first-among-equals kind of thing than anything that could be considered the equivalent of the title of Marshal.) :There's the blonds being indigenous and of the same stock as the "wild blonds" on the frontier. The early Spanish and Portuguese colonies did attempt to enslave the Amerinds, but abandoned the process for a variety of reasons, and by the time Jamestown was established enough to start a plantation economy, all the European colonies in the New World were using imported Africans exclusively for their slave labor. (Not for all their labor needs, of course.) :There's the War of 1218, and our complete lack of knowledge of what it entailed beyond Hesmucet as an enemy commander. I always sort of had the feeling it was in the much more distant past than the War of 1812 was from the perspective of the ACW. We've got no idea where the War Between the Provinces fell on the calendar in relation to 1218, nor for that matter whether 1218 refers to a date at all. :The fact that Richard the Haberdasher is a blood relative of Zachary the Rough and Ready but not of more recent royalty means Detina has undergone at least one dynastic change along the way. And the fact that Avram was Buchan's son and secession happened when the northerners essentially said "Yes, you're the royal son and heir, but we're not going to listen to you anyway" obviously rules out an Election of 1860. :On that last point, by the way: Some years ago Makk suggested that it would have been much better if Buchan had died childless. Avram is the son of his older sister, Geoffrey of his deceased younger brother. In a traditional primogeniture-based dynasty, that would set up a succession crisis. The call goes out to noble houses across the kingdom to gather in some sort of council to resolve the crisis. They break along regional lines. Since there are more southron lords, Avram wins, but the northern lords refuse to accept the result. I like that idea so much better that I've been using it as head canon. Turtle Fan (talk) 02:57, October 3, 2017 (UTC) We didn't even get names from the Louisiana and Texas provinces, did we?JonathanMarkoff (talk) 08:55, October 2, 2017 (UTC) :I don't think so. I dimly remember Old Capet being discussed as an equivalent to New Eborac in the same context as New Eborac is described as the namesake of the province as well as the city, but even if I am remembering that correctly--and I'm not confident--it's not the same thing. Turtle Fan (talk) 02:57, October 3, 2017 (UTC) Title change Following on my suggestion at Category:Soldiers of the Mexican War, any objection to rechristening this "Mexican-American War"? In case anyone is wondering: yes, I am suggesting this in light of the information regarding "In the Hall of the Montezumas". TR (talk) 02:41, March 27, 2019 (UTC) :Probably for the best. Turtle Fan (talk) 01:40, March 28, 2019 (UTC) :I suppose so. The Second Mexican War name is canonical so it should remain even if it was US vs CS. ML4E (talk) 21:58, March 28, 2019 (UTC)